Yu Nie v Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors

The decision of the Tribunal is that the appeal is dismissed. Reasons

1. This is the appeal of the Appellant, Mr Yu Nie, against the decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’), conveyed in a letter of 6 August 2025, to refuse his request for a third trainee licence.

2. The matter was listed before me for determination on the papers. I was satisfied that it was just and proper to proceed in that way. A small bundle prepared by DVSA was before me. The statutory framework

3. The Road Traffic Act 1988 (‘ the Act ’), s123(1) prohibits the giving of paid driving instruction except where the instructor’s name is included in the Register of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Register’) or he/she holds a trainee licence. Hereafter the usual abbreviation ‘ADI’ will be used.

4. Candidates for membership of the Register must fulfil a number of conditions. These include the requirement to pass an examination divided into three parts (‘the examination’): theory; driving ability and fitness; and instructional ability and fitness ( the Act , s125(3) (a)). They must apply for a part three test within two years of passing part one; if they do not, they must re-take the entire examination. Candidates who fail part three on three occasions must also re-take the entire examination. And in this case the current trainee licence comes to an end on the day following the third test. See the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005 (‘the Regulations’), reg 3(4)(c) and (d). The Regulations, reg 14(b)

5. By the Act , s129(1) it is provided that trainee licences are granted for the purpose of enabling prospective ADIs who have passed parts one and two of the examination to gain practical experience in driving instruction with a view to taking part three. Trainee licences are valid for six months only. The Registrar is expressly empowered to refuse to grant a trainee licence to an applicant to whom such a licence has previously been issued ( s129(3) ). It is clear from the language of s129 as a whole that trainee licences are not intended to serve as an alternative to registration.

6. The DVSA website (not, of course, a legal source) includes this advice: You should return your trainee licence to DVSA if you are not using it, for example because of a long period of illness. You will not get a refund, but DVSA will know that you have not had full use of the licence. This will be a factor in deciding whether to give you another licence in future . On the subject of applications for further trainee licences it states: You’re more likely to get another licence if you told DVSA you had stopped using the first, for example because of a period of illness. It’s unlikely that you’ll get another licence if you: • just want more time to pass the approved driving instructor (ADI) part 3 test • did not follow the rules for using your previous trainee licence These include a requirement to undertake a specified number of training hours over the first three months of the licence.

7. The effect of the Act , s129(6) is that, where a holder of a temporary licence applies during its currency for a fresh licence, the life of the original licence is extended until the commencement of the new licence or, if the application is refused and the holder appeals, until disposal of the appeal.

8. By the Act , s131(2) an appeal lies to the First-tier Tribunal against a decision to refuse an application for the grant of a licence. On the appeal, the Tribunal may make such order for the grant or refusal of the application as it sees fit ( s131(3) ). In a different but analogous statutory context in In the matter of the Bonas Group Pension Scheme [2011] UKUT B 33 (TCC) Warren J, sitting in the Upper Tribunal, held that there was nothing to constrain the first-instance Tribunal’s approach on appeal. Its function is simply to make its own decision on the evidence before it (which may differ from that before the statutory body whose decision is under challenge). Despite this latitude, however, high authority of general application recognises two important points. First, the burden is on an appellant to persuade the Tribunal that the relevant decision should be overturned or otherwise interfered with. Second, the Tribunal should give careful consideration to the reasons for the decision under challenge, given that Parliament has invested the relevant body with exclusive authority (subject to appeal) to make decisions on such matters. See eg R v Westminster Magistrates Court ex p Hope & Glory Public House Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 31 , paras 39-48 (Toulson LJ). The key facts

9. The background facts can be summarised as follows. 9.1 Mr Nie passed parts one and two of the examination on 20 December 2023 and 19 June 2024 respectively. 9.2 On Mr Nie’s application, the Registrar granted him two consecutive trainee licences, covering the period from 29 July 2024 to 27 July 2025. 9.3 On 27 July 2025 Mr Nie applied to the Registrar for a third licence. That application was refused by the letter of 6 August 2025, to which I have already referred. 9.4 Given the timing of the application for the third licence, the life of the second licence was extended by the Act , s129(6) to the date of disposal of this appeal (see above). 9.5 Mr Nie booked part three tests for 13 December 2024, 2 June 2025 and 28 October 2025. Unfortunately, he was unsuccessful at the first two. The third was cancelled and a fresh appointment made for 16 January 2026. The appeal

10. In support of his appeal, Mr Nie stressed that he was and remained profoundly committed to his chosen career as an ADI and had made significant progress towards achieving the necessary standard to pass the part three test. He urged the Tribunal to grant him a further licence to cover him until he has completed the part three test. At the time of the notice of appeal, his third attempt was booked for 28 October but, in view of the deferred date, I proceed on the footing that he asks me to extend his protection for a full six months running from 28 July 2025.

11. The Respondent resisted the appeal, stressing the importance of not allowing trainee licences to serve as an alternative to the registration system and the fact that eligibility to take the part three test is not conditional upon possession of a trainee licence. Generally, it was contended that the decision which Mr Nie seeks to challenge was solidly based and there was no good reason to disturb it. Discussion and conclusions

12. I am not persuaded that there is a good reason to allow this appeal. I agree with the remarks on the nature and purpose of the training licence system contained in the Respondent’s Response and on its website (see above). Those points argue convincingly against this appeal. That said, I give Mr Nie credit for his hard work and commitment and wish him well in his chosen career. As already noted, the effect of the appeal is that the current licence was automatically extended until the date of the Tribunal’s decision. In other words, he has secured the protection of ‘the badge’ for a consecutive period of well over 16 months to date. There is nothing to justify any extension beyond the date of publication of my Decision. But if he wishes to get some more practice between now and the test, there is nothing to stop him from doing so. The only restriction is that he cannot undertake driving instruction work for reward after his licence has expired. Outcome

13. For the reasons stated, I dismiss the appeal. (Signed) Anthony Snelson Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Date: 11 December 2025